Constitution Party won an election to a state legislature

lew · 11-17-2006, 10:00 AM

http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=359

"First of all, congratulations go out to Rick Jore, of Montana, who made history becoming the first Constitution Party candidate from any state to be elected to the state legislature, capturing the seat in Montana’s 12th District. Jore actually won in 2004, by three votes only to see the courts throw out enough ballots to give the Democrat the victory. This year, in a rematch, he won convincingly, garnering 56.2% of the vote and drubbing his Democrat opponent."

Ardentfrost · 11-17-2006, 10:04 AM

snap!

hsmith · 11-17-2006, 10:09 AM

but third parties can't get elected on their platforms!

ethyl · 11-17-2006, 10:40 AM

Constitution Party? Are they sort of far right social conservatives/ libertarians?

lew · 11-17-2006, 10:50 AM

They're socially conservative libertarians.

Thorgrim · 11-17-2006, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

but third parties can't get elected on their platforms!

third parties can, libertarians can't

hsmith · 11-17-2006, 01:36 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

third parties can, libertarians can't

Thorgrim · 11-17-2006, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

In TX-22, you had two people on the ballot in a very conservative district:

Left of Center, Lampson (Democrat) [who was too liberal for many people and kept polling near the 30s during the race]
Reasonable Fiscal Conservative, Smither (Libertarian)

What was the final result?
52% Lampson (Democrat)
6% Smither (Libertarian)
42% Write-in [rather than vote for a Libertarian or a Democrat]

motivez · 11-17-2006, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

accurate

Fixed.

He's correct until we start seeing some LP folks in office..

ethyl · 11-17-2006, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

In TX-22, you had two people on the ballot in a very conservative district:

Left of Center, Lampson (Democrat) [who was too liberal for many people and kept polling near the 30s during the race]
Reasonable Fiscal Conservative, Smither (Libertarian)

What was the final result?
52% Lampson (Democrat)
6% Smither (Libertarian)
42% Write-in [rather than vote for a Libertarian or a Democrat]

I've experienced where mentioning the term "libertarian" to a very naive conservative can sometimes elicit a negative reaction because it's so close to "liberal". Maybe libertarians should change their party name.

Thorgrim · 11-17-2006, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by ethyl

I've experienced where mentioning the term "libertarian" to a very naive conservative can sometimes elicit a negative reaction because it's so close to "liberal". Maybe libertarians should change their party name.

Yeah, but 6%? by your implication there are a lot of naive conservatives in TX22

motivez · 11-17-2006, 03:31 PM

I often wondered about that myself.. They've made Liberal such a dirty word, I wondered if "Liber....tarian" was often misinterpreted somehow by people who don't care that much about politics to really learn anything about third parties.

TheScatman · 11-17-2006, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by ethyl

Constitution Party? Are they sort of far right social conservatives/ libertarians?

Depends, their platform seems decently free market (although some protectionism but every member is different), and the guys website who got elected seems to be very open to free market in education, etc.

TheScatman · 11-17-2006, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

I often wondered about that myself.. They've made Liberal such a dirty word, I wondered if "Liber....tarian" was often misinterpreted somehow by people who don't care that much about politics to really learn anything about third parties.

or people immediatly think drug user. "Constitution" is a better word since that what most libertarians want, a small, limited Constitutional federal government

TheScatman · 11-17-2006, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by lew

They're socially conservative libertarians.

If you could push them away from their protectionist views and get them to get gov't out of marriage all the way they may have something

TheScatman · 11-17-2006, 03:39 PM

From Their Platform:

Wage and Price Controls
We deny that civil government has the authority to set wages and prices; so doing is inconsistent with principles of individual liberty and the free market.

Drug Abuse
The Constitution Party will uphold the right of states and localities to restrict access to drugs and to enforce such restrictions. We support legislation to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the United States from foreign sources. As a matter of self-defense, retaliatory policies including embargoes, sanctions, and tariffs, should be considered.

At the same time, we will take care to prevent violations of the Constitutional and civil rights of American citizens. Searches without probable cause and seizures without due process must be prohibited, and the presumption of innocence must be preserved.

Second part about the 4th amendment is good, and I guess you have to start somewhere. At least it sounds like they want to get rid of the federal drug war

lew · 11-17-2006, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by TheScatman

If you could push them away from their protectionist views and get them to get gov't out of marriage all the way they may have something

I disagree with their views on marriage, but I am somewhat of a Protectionist.

lew · 11-17-2006, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by TheScatman

From Their Platform:

Wage and Price Controls
We deny that civil government has the authority to set wages and prices; so doing is inconsistent with principles of individual liberty and the free market.

Drug Abuse
The Constitution Party will uphold the right of states and localities to restrict access to drugs and to enforce such restrictions. We support legislation to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the United States from foreign sources. As a matter of self-defense, retaliatory policies including embargoes, sanctions, and tariffs, should be considered.

At the same time, we will take care to prevent violations of the Constitutional and civil rights of American citizens. Searches without probable cause and seizures without due process must be prohibited, and the presumption of innocence must be preserved.

Second part about the 4th amendment is good, and I guess you have to start somewhere. At least it sounds like they want to get rid of the federal drug war

Yeah, they're very much for state rights. They're against the Federal War on Drugs, but they're ok with states either allowing or not allowing drugs.

lew · 11-17-2006, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

third parties can, libertarians can't

Some could argue that the Constitution Party is "more extreme" than Libertarians.

TheScatman · 11-17-2006, 03:43 PM

Although this sounds more like it:

We affirm the principles of inherent individual rights upon which these United States of America were founded:

That each individual is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness;
That the freedom to own, use, exchange, control, protect, and freely dispose of property is a natural, necessary and inseparable extension of the individual's unalienable rights;
That the legitimate function of government is to secure these rights through the preservation of domestic tranquility, the maintenance of a strong national defense, and the promotion of equal justice for all;
That history makes clear that left unchecked, it is the nature of government to usurp the liberty of its citizens and eventually become a major violator of the people's rights; and
That, therefore, it is essential to bind government with the chains of the Constitution and carefully divide and jealously limit government powers to those assigned by the consent of the governed.